![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Water Gypsies - Julian Dutton
This should have been exactly the kind of book I enjoy. I love England's canal systems and narrowboats and would love to know more about the lives of the people who lived on these waterways.
Sadly, Dutton's book keeps on making me want to throw it across the room!
He has an obsession with a mystic bond between rivermen and rivers, with pagan beliefs about rivers influencing everything to do with them, gypsy origins, etc.
eg. I'm reading through an interesting page on the London docklands and then I hit "Rivers as places of festivals, pageants and days of leisure were obviously descended from ancient rituals of appeasing the gods of the waterways"
It's utter nonsense. There is no proof of any kind to suggest that leisure boaters are desiring to appease ancient gods, and I don't believe it for an instant.
He wants magic and romance and gypsy origins for watermen, and carefully selects his sources to find ones that support this.
eg. page 79 "The mutual love of step dancing and music points to an affinity quite probably based on blood and inheritance."
Any dance historian will know that step dance was widely popular in England, was performed in music halls, danced by men in pubs, etc. It was most certainly not confined to Gypsies.
Same with narrowboat painting. Dutton quotes Rolt, (who had similarly over-romanticised views) who was convinced that the progenitor of narrowboat art was gypsy caravans. But if one bothers to read Flowers Afloat: Folk Artists of the Canals Hardcover – by Tony Lewery - then it's clear that there were many influences on narrowboat painting, including popular Victorian mass produced pictures, pottery designs, painted tea trays, etc.
But Lewery isn't even listed in the bibliography.
Sadly, I find I can't read more than a max of three pages before hitting yet another unsupported belief. Which is a shame, because there is some good stuff in-between the the nonsense.
But the nonsense makes me so frustrated, that I'm giving this away without completing it, and will doubtless return to reading one of Charles Hadfield's canal history books. Far less accessible, but at least they stick to actual facts.
Sadly, Dutton's book keeps on making me want to throw it across the room!
He has an obsession with a mystic bond between rivermen and rivers, with pagan beliefs about rivers influencing everything to do with them, gypsy origins, etc.
eg. I'm reading through an interesting page on the London docklands and then I hit "Rivers as places of festivals, pageants and days of leisure were obviously descended from ancient rituals of appeasing the gods of the waterways"
It's utter nonsense. There is no proof of any kind to suggest that leisure boaters are desiring to appease ancient gods, and I don't believe it for an instant.
He wants magic and romance and gypsy origins for watermen, and carefully selects his sources to find ones that support this.
eg. page 79 "The mutual love of step dancing and music points to an affinity quite probably based on blood and inheritance."
Any dance historian will know that step dance was widely popular in England, was performed in music halls, danced by men in pubs, etc. It was most certainly not confined to Gypsies.
Same with narrowboat painting. Dutton quotes Rolt, (who had similarly over-romanticised views) who was convinced that the progenitor of narrowboat art was gypsy caravans. But if one bothers to read Flowers Afloat: Folk Artists of the Canals Hardcover – by Tony Lewery - then it's clear that there were many influences on narrowboat painting, including popular Victorian mass produced pictures, pottery designs, painted tea trays, etc.
But Lewery isn't even listed in the bibliography.
Sadly, I find I can't read more than a max of three pages before hitting yet another unsupported belief. Which is a shame, because there is some good stuff in-between the the nonsense.
But the nonsense makes me so frustrated, that I'm giving this away without completing it, and will doubtless return to reading one of Charles Hadfield's canal history books. Far less accessible, but at least they stick to actual facts.
no subject
no subject
And agree 100% with your assessment. I've read books like that, and met plenty of people spouting that kind of personification. I think it is a side effect of the Gaia theory, which I do (more or less) agree with. Does working on the river permeate a person's outlook, and even their body? Sure it does, but not because some god or goddess "did it" to them.
no subject